LSAT 122 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q23

LR Question 23 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Perception cannot be a relationship between a conscious…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

ANALOGOUS FLAWED ARGUMENT: “Animals that we feed cannot be pets, because we do not give food to some animals that are pets.”

PARAPHRASE OF ARGUMENT: Perception cannot be when we have beliefs about material objects, because we have beliefs about some material objects which are imperceptible (cannot be perceived).

ANALYSIS: This reads like gobbledygook to most test-takers. When you come across a question like this, simply pause, read slowly and consider what is going on. You don’t necessarily even need to figure out what an “imperceptible material object” is to solve this question.

Here is the structure of the argument: C can never be D, because some of D can never be C. (In the original argument, it’s also plausible that C can in fact be D.)

___________

1. CORRECT. This is it. Even though we have aesthetic reactions to non-art, that doesn’t mean we can’t have aesthetic reactions to art. And it’s quite plausible that art can produce aesthetic reactions.
2. It’s possible those people had an obligation, but were merely breaking it.
3. This feels similar, but the structure is different. It would have to say, “because sometimes we direct actions towards solving problems which cannot be solved.”
4. This is a bad argument; the assertion could be a true statement about happiness even if we can’t measure the comparison. But it’s not the same flaw.
5. We could investigate without the possibility of understanding. But that’s nitpicking, and if we don’t consider that point this is actually a good argument.

Recap: The question begins with “Perception cannot be a relationship between a conscious”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flawed Parallel questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.